Dispositions matter: Findings for at‐risk teacher candidates

This article was downloaded by: [University of Ulster Library]On: 07 December 2014, At: 03:35Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Teacher EducatorPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/utte20

Dispositions matter: Findings for at‐risk teachercandidatesSarah Edwards a & Nancy Edick aa Teacher Education , University of Nebraska , OmahaPublished online: 20 Jan 2010.

To cite this article: Sarah Edwards & Nancy Edick (2006) Dispositions matter: Findings for at‐risk teacher candidates, TheTeacher Educator, 42:1, 1-14, DOI: 10.1080/08878730609555390

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08878730609555390

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/utte20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/08878730609555390

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08878730609555390

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

The Teacher Educator, vol. 42, no. 1, Summer 2006

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Dispositions Matter: Findings forAt-Risk Teacher Candidates

Sarah Edwards and Nancy EdickTeacher Education, University of Nebraska at Omaha

Abstract

This study explores the process of one teacher preparation program in theMidwest as it systematically identified attributes of teacher candidateswho were at risk of not completing the teacher preparation program. The5 years represented by these data included 92 cases of teacher candidatesidentified as being in jeopardy of failing the program. Quantitative andqualitative methodologies were employed to determine the nature of theattributes of the at-risk teacher candidates, who represented approximate-ly 10% of the overall teacher education program population. The resultsidentify commonalities among the candidates at risk for failure in theteacher education program in the domains of knowledge representation,skills, and, particularly, dispositions.

The description of an effective teacher has changed. In the past,teacher preparation programs focused primarily on developing teach-er candidates' knowledge and skills (Brophy & Good, 1986). In addi-tion to knowledge and skills, however, research now suggests that ateacher's effectiveness may also depend on the development of profes-sional dispositions such as sensitivity to student differences and abili-ty to communicate with colleagues and parents (CoIIinson, Killeavy,& Stephenson, 1999; Major, 2003; Ukpokodu, 2002). Over the pastdecade, many teacher institutions have adopted standards from theNational Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE,2002) and from the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and SupportConsortium (INTASC, 1992), which identifieslO assessment prin-ciples for beginning teachers. Each of the standards addresses theknowledge, skills, and dispositions deemed essential for all teachers.

As Taylor and Wasicsko (2000) pointed out,

It is important for teacher educators to know and understand the dispo-sitions of effective teachers, so as to design experiences that will help to

1

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f U

lste

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

3:35

07

Dec

embe

r 20

14


develop these characteristics in students and to help students discover ifthey have the dispositions to teach, (p. 2)

NCATE (2002) provided the following definition of dispositions:

[Dispositions are] the values, commitments and professional ethics thatinfluence behaviors toward students, families, colleagues, and communi-ties and affect student learning, motivation, and development as well asthe educator's own professional growth. Dispositions are guided by beliefsand attitudes related to values such as caring, fairness, honesty, responsi-bility, and social justice. For example, they might include a belief that allstudents can learn, a vision of high and challenging standards, or a com-mitment to a safe and supportive learning environment, (p. 53)

Although this definition is valuable, it is not rooted in theoreti-cal or empirical research. Teacher preparation institutions pursuingaccreditation through NCATE are held accountable for measuringteacher candidates' knowledge, skills, and dispositions, as well astheir impact on PreK-12 learning. Assessing teacher candidate's dis-positions toward nationally mandated standards such as INTASCpresents a challenge for most teacher preparation institutions, withprograms operating at varying stages in responding to the NCATEmandate. Some programs grapple with the very notion of disposi-tions, whereas other teacher educators are aligning curricula toaddress and assess teacher candidate dispositions (Edick, Danielson,& Edwards, 2005). Overall, very litde information is available toguide the actions of teachers, teacher candidates, teacher educators,or administrators in the documentation or assessment of effectiveteacher dispositions. In this paper we describe the development ofan operational definition of dispositions as an initial step in measur-ing the development and assessment of teacher dispositions in aMidwestern metropolitan college of education.

Defining Teacher Dispositions

Research in the area of dispositions is emergent at best. Currentdiscussions of teacher dispositions (Balzano & Murray, 2003; Taylor& Wasicsko, 2000) are focused on the topics of definitions and char-acteristics. These discussions tend to center around the notion of dis-positions as an expression of beliefs in action.

Katz (1993) referred to a disposition as a pattern of behaviorexhibited frequently and in the absence of coercion, constituting a

2

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f U

lste

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

3:35

07

Dec

embe

r 20

14


habit of mind that is intentional and oriented to broad goals and isunder some conscious and voluntary control. Dispositions have alsobeen defined as values, commitments, or ethics that are internallyheld and externally exhibited (Cudahy, Finnan, Jaruszewicz, &McCarty, 2002).

Usher (2002) defined dispositions as "The qualities that charac-terize a person as an individual: the controlling perceptual (mental,emotional, spiritual) qualities that determine the persons natural orusual ways of thinking and acting" (p. 2). A similar definition byFreeman (2004) capitalized on the critical thinking aspect of disposi-tions, stating that a "disposition consists of value or belief, an inten-tion or desire that the value or belief be actualized, and the skills orknowledge necessary to give reality to the intention" (p. 4). Althoughthese definitions provide an umbrella statement for understandingthe nature of dispositions, they vary in the importance they place onthe balance between thoughts and actions.

Dispositions as Effective Teaching

In the last 3 decades, a revolution has occurred in the definitionsof good teaching as research has revealed a rich and varied pictureof effective teaching. One shift has been away from an emphasis oncontent and pedagogical knowledge toward a definition that includesreflective decision-making and personal characteristics (Burden &Byrd, 2003). Stronge (2002) reviewed decades of research in an effortto delineate effective teacher behaviors. In addition to skills andknowledge, the identified dispositions of effective teachers includedcaring, fairness, and respect; enthusiasm and motivation; reflectivepractice; positive attitude toward teaching; and friendly and personalinteractions with students. These dispositions were clearly identifiedas integral to a teacher's effectiveness in the classroom.

The recent introduction of dispositions does not, however,ignore the traditional areas of skills and knowledge. Collinson et al.(1999), in their search for a more comprehensive understanding ofteacher excellence, concluded that excellence goes beyond traditionalideas of expert or professional knowledge and expertise to includedispositions. This analysis of effective teachers suggests, "what makesexcellent teachers recognizable may be a combination of competence,skillful relationships, and character" (p. 7). Usher (2002) is anotherresearcher who has expanded the focus on skills and knowledge,reformulating Combs' (1974) definition of dispositions to include

3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f U

lste

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

3:35

07

Dec

embe

r 20

14


empathy, a positive view of others, a positive view of self, authentici-ty, and a meaningful purpose and vision. The teacher dispositions areseen as an addition to the definition of effective teaching, not as areplacement of skills or knowledge.

As an element of teacher excellence, dispositions may also becontextual. Haberman's (1995) work supported the notion that dis-positions required for effective teaching in schools with populationsof predominately at-risk students would be substantially differentfrom those required for effective teaching in schools with populationsfrom middle to upper income families. Thus, the field of research ondefining and describing dispositions as an element of effective teach-ing will likely continue to grow.

As is evident in the literature, the contribution of dispositions toeffective teaching is a complex notion that is challenging—but notimpossible—to define and to assess. This has implications for teacherpreparation programs challenged to ensure their programs encompassnot only teacher pedagogical knowledge and skills, but also disposi-tional skills such as opinions, attitudes, beliefs, and values.

Methods and Data Analysis

The college of education identified in this study utilized a proc-ess known as a conference of concern to identify and refer teachercandidates who were in jeopardy of being unsuccessful in completingthe teacher preparation program. The sample used in this researchconsisted of the cases of 92 teacher candidates who participated in aconference of concern from January 1996 until June 2001. A confer-ence of concern was initiated when faculty or cooperating teacherscompleted a brief form indicating area(s) of concern. At the confer-ence, which included the student and several college personnel, issuesof concern were identified and discussed. Issues of concern varied andincluded punctuality and attendance, as well as inappropriate actionsin dealing with student behavior. These cases represented approxi-mately 10% of the teacher candidates enrolled in the college duringthat same period.

The research team examining the archival records of conferencesof concern included three university professors and one graduate stu-dent with prior research experience. The researchers initially employ-ed a quantitative analysis, using t tests on all 92 files, to determine ifthe candidates in this sample were representative of the teacher candi-dates at large during the same time period. These analyses showed

4

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f U

lste

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

3:35

07

Dec

embe

r 20

14


that the conference of concern students had a slightly lower gradepoint average than the comparative students. However, these differ-ences were not found on the ACT or PPST scores and therefore didnot accurately indicate issues that may have caused these teacher can-didates to need conferences of concern (see Table 1). Because this ini-tial statistical analysis did not provide us with data to understandwhat set the students of our sample group apart from their successfulcolleagues, the research team turned to qualitative data analysis for adifferent view.

GPA

ACT

PPST Reading

PPST Writing

PPST Math

Table 1Group Comparisons

Conference ofConcern Students

M(SD)

337 (0.40)

21.97(3.53)

176.73 (4.64)

175.60 (2.69)

178.58 (5.26)

ComparativeStudentsM(SD)

3.48 (0.36)

21.04 (3.45)

178.73 (5.27)

175.48 (4.02)

178.62 (6.38)

t(n)

-2.717(90)

1.513 (32)1.668(14)

0.173(14)

0.024(11)

p

.008

.140

.118

.865

.981

d

0.28

0.26

0.43

0.04

0.008

Researchers determined tlirough initial reading of the 92 filesthat the issues addressed in the conferences of concern were primarilyrooted in teacher dispositions rather than in teacher skills and knowl-edge. To uncover the experiences of the conference of concern candi-dates, grounded theory (Glaser, 1998) was selected as the researchdesign for this study. Glaser's (1992) constant comparative methodwas employed as a framework for the data analysis. This method ofanalysis is widely used in naturalistic studies and requires a constantcomparing of newly acquired data to previously coded data. Thestages of category coding, refinement of categories, exploration of therelationships across categories, and understandings of the integrateddata (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994) helped identify the meaningsfrom within the data sources.

Two researchers read the files independently in order to assessinter-rater reliability. Data analysis began with the researchers iden-tifying key words and phrases from the files (Coffey & Atkinson,1996). The researchers coded independently, but regularly comparedtheir initial coding of key words and phrases, leading to discussionsof terms and initial categories. The few discrepancies that arose werediscussed with a third researcher who then added to the discussionuntil consensus was reached on all initial codes.

5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f U

lste

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

3:35

07

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Categories aligned with the 10 INTASC Principles began toemerge. The files were then coded according to the 35 dispositionalstatements identified under the INTASC Principles. Many of the fileswere given more than one code, as the issues documented were oftencomplex and multifaceted. In all, a total of 219 dispositional issueswere identified in the 92 files. The classifications revealed a strongconcentration of dispositional concerns centered on 5 of the 35 pos-sible categories. Specifically, 167 issues—over 76% of the total num-ber of issues—were aligned with five dispositional statements foundunder the INTASC Principles (see Table 2).

Table 2Percentages of Concern

Principle 1, Disposition C: The teacher hasenthusiasm for the discipline(s) she teaches andsees connections to everyday life.

Principle 2, Disposition A: The teacher appre-ciates individual variations within each area ofdevelopment, shows respect for the diverse talentsof all learners, and is committed to help themdevelop self-confidence and competence.

Principle 5, Disposition A: The teacher takesresponsibility for establishing a positive climatein the classroom and participates in maintainingsuch a climate in the school as a whole.

Principle 7, Disposition C: The teacher valuesplanning as a collegial activity.

Principle 9, Disposition E: The teacher recognizeshis/her professional responsibility for engaging inand supporting professional practices for self andcolleagues.

Categories

Number ofConcerns

22

18

42

30

55

Percentage ofTotal Concern

10%

8%

19%

14%

25%

To further explore the relationships of these 219 dispositionalissues, the research team decided to look for connections to skills andknowledge. The framework of Shulman's (1986) seven categories ofteacher knowledge was utilized to further analyze the data and identi-fy emerging categories (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996) of concerns forteacher candidates. Shulman's categories were used as a means of sep-

6

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f U

lste

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

3:35

07

Dec

embe

r 20

14


arating content and pedagogy concerns from dispositional concerns.Specifically, the areas of content knowledge; pedagogical contentknowledge; knowledge of learners; general pedagogical knowledge;knowledge of educational contexts; curriculum knowledge; andknowledge of educational ends, purposes, and values were examined(see Table 3).

Table 3Comparison ofShulman s Categories and Concern

Content Knowledge

Pedagogical Content Knowledge

Knowledge of Learners

General Pedagogical Knowledge

Knowledge of Educational Centexts

Curriculum Knowledge

Knowledge of Educational Ends,Purposes, and Values

Number ofConcerns

52311

113

6700

Categories

Percentage ofTotal Concern

2%

11%

5%52%

31%

0%

0%

This level of analysis brought a focus to the relationships of theissues across the categories of the INTASC principles and specifi-cally to the 35 subcategories of the dispositional statements. The firstcategorization of concerns as seen through the INTASC dispositionsallowed the researchers to see where larger numbers of occurrencesexisted, but this level of analysis provided a way to consider theknowledge and skills concerns as well as look for patterns across thedispositional concerns. When considering the data in this way, thelarge numbers of concerns in the area of general pedagogical knowl-edge had commonalities that led to the emergence of the disposition-al theme of relationship building in the classroom. Within the 219dispositional issues, inabilities to form meaningful relationships withothers in the educational community were deeply imbedded.

Findings

Teacher candidates are expected to form professional relation-ships with both students and adults in the educational setting. Theserelationships form the basis for building trust, respect, and collegiali-ty in the workplace. The 92 conference of concern candidates in thisstudy lacked an overall ability to form and maintain professional rela-

7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f U

lste

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

3:35

07

Dec

embe

r 20

14


tionships. The two relationship themes identified centered on candi-dates' professional relationships with students and on professionalrelationships with colleagues—including cooperating teachers, uni-versity supervisors, and peers.

Professional Relationships With StudentsOf the 92 candidates in this study, 63 were referred for a confer-

ence of concern due to their inability to bridge the gap betweenthemselves and the students. Candidates did not develop relation-ships with the students necessary to build on the students' strengths.One candidate, in particular, was told,

I see very little effort in your wanting to connect with the kids. Youappear to be uneasy and uncomfortable in just talking with them. Youhad a great opportunity to visit with some kids who arrived in the class-room early this afternoon. As you waited for the other students, youcould have talked with the kids about numerous things. You paced theroom asking them to be quiet and get ready to work. There was nothingfor them to do during that time.

The theme of weak professional relationships with students con-tained four categories: (a) providing relevance and showing enthusi-asm for lessons, (b) showing respect for diverse talents of all learners,(c) respecting students as individuals, and (d) encouraging manymodes of communication in the classroom. Each of the four cate-gories in this theme is discussed below.

The first category is directly related to the first INTASC Princi-ple's disposition: "The teacher has enthusiasm for the discipline(s)she teaches and sees connections to everyday life" (INTASC, 1992,p. 14). In the category of providing relevance and showing enthusi-asm for lessons, 22 candidates were represented. The weak relation-ships with students typified by issues in this category were generatedby candidates' inabilities to provide a bridge between lesson planobjectives and students' experiences. Candidates' lack of enthusiasmwas also manifested in a variety of ways. Some candidates appearedtimid around the students and hesitant to initiate conversations; oth-ers reluctant to act (e.g., standing behind a desk or podium, sitting ata desk in a position of power). These relationships also suffered as thecandidates neglected to link the personal experiences of the studentsand the subject matter being taught. Whether through physical sepa-ration or via an attitude that revealed candidates' disconnection fromthe classroom, these candidates did not foster inviting, professional

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f U

lste

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

3:35

07

Dec

embe

r 20

14


relationships with the students.A second category, displaying weak relationships with students,

revolved around the second INTASC Principle's disposition that rec-ommends teachers show respect for diverse talents of all learners.Specifically, this disposition suggests the role of the teacher is to assiststudents' development of self-confidence and competence. In 18 inci-dents, the candidates were not able or willing to accommodate orsupport the needs of various learners in the classroom. One commonexperience is shown through the words of a candidate who said, "Itaught it, so I don't know why they didn't get it." Of the 18 inci-dents, 16 revealed a stronger focus on the subject matter than ontheir students' abilities to interact and process the material, failingto produce differentiated learning experiences in a regular fashion.

The third category, respecting students as individuals, had nineclear examples based on the third INTASC Principle's dispositionthat states, "The teacher respects students as individuals with differ-ing personal and family backgrounds and various skills, talents, andinterests" (INTASC, 1992, p. 19). This category was primarily basedon issues of culture, including race and socio-economic status. Again,the candidates' inability to form meaningful relationships with thestudents underlies this disposition. Specific xenophobic characteris-tics, such as being hesitant to work with special education studentsor making vague comments about various groups of kids as untrust-worthy by nature, were displayed by 3 of the candidates. More com-mon, however, were the cases of candidates who reflected on theirown educational backgrounds as the only perspective in approachingclassroom instruction and interactions.

Finally, we found 14 examples of candidates' inability to useeffective verbal, nonverbal, and media communication to foster activeinquiry, collaboration, and supportive interaction in the classroom asdiscussed in Principle 6 of the INTASC standards. This dispositionincludes active listening and demonstrating the ability to be a respon-sive listener. Candidate issues ranged from failure to provide appro-priate feedback and praise to use of limited questioning skills. Insome instances, candidates were not responsive to students whatso-ever. For example, when one candidate was teaching a poetry lesson,he repeatedly told the students they were wrong in their interpreta-tions, as shown in an observational record:

He brow-beat the students. He told them they were "wrong" and showedthem the "right" response and ignored that they became ever more quietand withdrawn. At one point, a student said, "I just interpreted that line

9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f U

lste

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

3:35

07

Dec

embe

r 20

14


differently than you did, it doesn't mean you have to call it wrong." [Thecandidate] said "Oh, really? Let's say you are in math class and you have astudent write on the board, '10x10=50' Is the teacher supposed to not say,'wrong' about that either?"

Examples such as these show a dear disregard for the students andhint at possible power issues in the relationship between the candi-dates and the students in the classroom.

Professional Relationships With ColleaguesThe most prevalent theme in the relationship data was an inabili-

ty to work with other adults in the field of education. Teacher candi-dates are expected to shape and refine instructional techniques andmanagement skills. An expectation exists that the candidate willestablish professional working relationships during field experienceswithin the triad of the university, the candidate, and the placementsite. Relationships with colleagues include those with peers, teachers,administrative staff, and university personnel. This category of work-ing with colleagues within the theme of professional relationshipsappeared to be the heart of the majority of the 92 cases documentedover the 5-year period. A total of 94 of the 219 issues were coded inthis theme. Collectively, these 94 events occurred in 74 (83%) of thecases. The inability to work collegially with other adults occurred intwo different dispositional categories. The first area is reflected in thedisposition from Principle 7, "The teacher values planning as a colle-gial activity" (INTASC, 1992, p. 27), with 30 of the 94 events in thisarea. The second area was the largest with 64 examples coded underthe disposition from Principle 9: "The teacher recognizes his/her pro-fessional responsibility for engaging in and supporting professionalpractices for self and colleagues" (INTASC, 1992, p. 31).

Although these dispositions fall under different principles, theyare connected at what appears to be the roots of the concerns for thecandidates involved in conferences of concern—an inability to inter-nalize constructive criticism and thrive when support, feedback, andguidance are provided through the stages of learning how to teach.While the concerns expressed in the data fall under the two disposi-tions dealing with what would appear to be professional behavior, theindividual examples within this area are as diverse as are the candi-dates. For example, some candidates did not share their lesson planswith the cooperating teachers, establishing an adversarial relationshipbetween the two partners in the classroom. Other candidates wereunwilling to accept guidance in dealing with student misbehavior,

10

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f U

lste

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

3:35

07

Dec

embe

r 20

14

The Teacher Educator, voL 42, no. 1, Summer 2006

which often resulted in a lack of support from a cooperating teacherfor a candidate who did not embrace a collaborative role in the class-room. Often, the candidates involved in these concerns made excusesfor their teaching rather than asking for assistance in planninglessons.

In looking for trends within this area of adult relationships, theresearchers found the data to be too incomplete to support furtherassumptions as to the deeper reasons why candidates were not willingto accept support, guidance, and feedback from their cooperatingteachers; approach secretarial staff in a more professional manner; ordevelop working relationships with their university supervisors. Whatcan be said is that those who could not work out a way to accept thesupport and guidance offered them during their teaching experiencesdid not succeed in finishing the program. This research suggests thata description of effective teaching includes knowledge and skills, butthese two areas alone are not sufficiently illustrative. Dispositionsappear to provide meaningful influences on the success of teachercandidates.

Discussion and Conclusions

Teacher preparation programs are at a critical stage in that theymust find ways to define and assess knowledge, skills, and disposi-tions to teach. Although a wealth of research exists that discusses theacquisition of teaching knowledge and skills, little research can befound that addresses the topic of dispositions. The ability for teachereducation institutions to define candidates' knowledge, performance,and dispositions is essential. The first step for the institution in thisstudy was to look at the archival records of candidate concerns tofind issues to inform a statement of the dispositions necessary forcandidates to succeed as effective practitioners. The following defini-tion of teacher dispositions emerged from those data: Dispositionsare attitudes and beliefs expressed via student and collegia! relation-ships used to negotiate the context of schooling. Within this workingdefinition of dispositions are two types of relationships—one withstudents and another with colleagues. Whereas the research supportsthe inclusion of teacher-student relationships, little is reported on theimpact of teacher-colleague relationships.

Research suggests that teacher-student relationships have a sig-nificant influence on overall school achievement. Close relationshipsare critical for the development of skills (Collins &C Laursen, 2004).

11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f U

lste

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

3:35

07

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Students need a significant relationship or a strong bond to both theschool in general and teachers specifically in order for learning tooccur (Anderson, Christenson, Sinclair, & Lehr, 2004; Comer,1988).

Teven's (2001) research supported the notion of relationships asan aspect of professional dispositions in reporting that teacher imme-diacy and responsiveness have significant positive impact on students'perceptions of teacher caring. Yoon (2002) also identified teachercharacteristics or dispositions that are predictive of the quality ofteacher-student relationships. Finally, Skinner and Belmont (1993)reported that teacher dispositions had an impact on children's percep-tions of the teacher and that those perceptions had a positive effecton the students' engagement in learning.

Our results indicate that specific dispositional characteristics arecommonly present in teacher candidates who are likely to encounterproblems in completing a teacher preparation program. These dispo-sitions are evident in the teacher preparation process and are rootedin the ability (or inability) to form and maintain relationships withboth students and colleagues. Further research is needed to determineways to foster appropriate dispositions, challenge incorrect disposi-tions, and provide accurate feedback to teacher candidates as theydevelop dispositions necessary in order to become effective teachers.This information is valuable for teacher educators who seek practicesto support standards-based assessment of the growth and develop-ment of teacher candidates in all three areas of skills, knowledge, anddispositions for teaching.

References

Anderson, A. R., Christenson, S. L., Sinclair, M. F., & Lehr, C. (2004). Check& connect: The importance of relationships for promoting engagementwith school. Journal of School Psychology, 42 (2), 95-113.

Balzano, B. A., & Murray, C. E. (2003). Do you know them when you see them?Teacher candidate dispositions. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting ofthe American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education, New Orleans,LA.

Burden, P. R., & Byrd, D. M. (2003). Methods of effective teaching. Boston:Allyn & Bacon.

Brophy, J., & Good, T. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement.In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.,pp. 328-375). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

12

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f U

lste

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

3:35

07

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data: Complemen-tary research strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Collins, W. A., & Laursen, B. (2004). Changing relationships, changing youth:Interpersonal contexts of adolescent development. Journal of Early Adoles-cence, 24 (1), 55-62.

Collinson, V., Killeavy, M., & Stephenson, H. (1999, October). Exemplaryteachers: Practicing an ethic of care in England, Ireland, and the UnitedStates. Journal for a Just and Caring Education 5, 340-366.

Combs, A. W. (1974). Humanistic goals of education. Educational accountability:A humanistic perspective. San Francisco: Shields.

Comer, J. P. (1988). Educating poor minority children. Scientific American,259 (5), 42-48.

Cudahy, D., Finnan, C , Jaruszewicz, C , & McCarty, B. (2002). Seeing disposi-tions: Translating our shared values into observable behavior. Paper presentedat the First Annual Symposium on Educator Dispositions, Richmond, KY.

Edick, N., Danielson, L., & Edwards, S. (2005). Dispositions: Defining, aligning,and assessing. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the AmericanAssociation of Colleges for Teacher Education, Washington, DC.

Freeman, L. (2004). Dispositions in teacher education: Some of the unresolvedissues. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Associationof Colleges of Teacher Education, Chicago, IL.

Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA:Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. G. (1998). Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussions. Mill Valley,CA: Sociology Press.

Haberman, M. (1995). Selecting "star" teachers for children and youth in urbanpoverty. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 777-781.

Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC).(1992). Model standards for beginning teacher licensing and development.Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers. Retrieved onFebruary 10, 2003, from http://www.ccsso.org/content/pdfs/corestrd.pdf

Katz, L. G. (1993). Dispositions: Definitions and implications for early childhoodpractice (Catalog #211). Champaign, IL: Clearinghouse on Early Educationand Parenting.

Major, E. M. (2003). Fostering positive dispositions toward diversity; Dialogicalexplorations of a moral dilemma. Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(4), 1-17.

Maykut, P., & Morehouse, R. (1994). Beginning qualitative research: Aphilosophic and practical guide. London: Falmer Press.

National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). (2002).Professional standards for the accreditation of schools, colleges, and departmentsof education. Washington, DC: Author.

Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching.Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4—14.

Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Recipro-cal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement. Journal of Educa-tional Psychology, 85(4), 571-581.

13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f U

lste

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

3:35

07

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Stronge, J. H. (2002). Qualities of effective teachers. Alexandria, VA: Associationfor Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Taylor, R. L, & Wasicsko, M. M. (2000). The dispositions to teach. Paper pre-sented at the Annual Southern Regional Association of Teacher EducatorsConference, Lexington, KY.

Teven, J. J. (2001). Relationships among teacher characteristics and perceivedcaring. Communication Education, 50(2), 159—169.

Ukpokodu, N. (2002). Breaking through preservice teachers' defensive disposi-tions in a multicultural education course: A reflective practice. Multicultur-al Education, 9, 25-33.

Usher, D. (2002). Arthur Combs' five dimensions of helper belief reformulated asfive dispositions of teacher effectiveness. Paper presented at the First AnnualSymposium on Educator Dispositions, Richmond, KY.

Yoon, J. (2002). Teacher characteristics as predictors of teacher-student relation-ships, stress, negative effect, and self-efficacy. Social Behavior & Personality:An International Journal, 30(5), 485-493.

14

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f U

lste

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

3:35

07

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Documents

Dispositions matter: Findings for at‐risk teacher candidates